Ogre Battle 64 came out 25 years ago and in every playthrough I've completed, I've finished with a different number/style of units. Building each member up and pairing them with a unit is such a great game mechanic! Excited to see the possibilities on March 8th!
@@TheGameReaper948 ...you get kabong'd! They're standin' tough, 'cause you know that armor's stuffed! Filled with a stalwart ally, them foes are all gonna die!
Great video! Always loved armor units, despite their weaknesses. It's a blast throwing them at the right opponents and watching them all crumble against the wall.
People will hate, HATE Arden in FE4 Remake if the large map system is back. I always enjoy making him the best unit slaying both enemies and the ladies lol.
I adore Armoured units. Heavy Armour is my absolute jam. Draug, Valbar, Lukas, Forsyth, Arden, Gwendolyn (even if her brother and other compatriot are better), Oswin, Hector (not really an "armour" unit but he has the stats and looks of one), Gilliam, especially General Amelia (because taking a waif of a girl and making her into a brute powerhouse that can swing a greataxe in one hand like it's nothing is both hilarious and endearing to me), Kellam, Effie (prefer her JP version), Benny, most anyone in Three Houses (it became a meme for me to run a full team of Fortress Knights against the most magic-heavy routes), Louis, and Jade (personal favourite character from Engage). I cannot overstate how much I love heavy armour characters / units. I'm always using characters like the Man-at-Arms and Leper in Darkest Dungeon, or anything similar! I'd never heard of this game before... Definitely going to have to look into it. The ability the armour units have, to defend an ally in place of them, reminds me of Archibald from Stella Glow - he did the same thing. Saved my butt a lot on the final bosses.
The second comment might be a slight correction if the style plays like ogre battle. It would be a march speed change and not a range because you can set a range. Then to answer your slight inquiries, if it plays like ogre battle then the terrain to u it type would most likely effect the speed. Then with the flyers being able to carry the units. I hope they made all flyers faster than 1 flyer carrying infantry but that will be revealed later possible after release
I'm thinking they might just be leaning into other bonus to keep you off all flying squads like wanting certain leader skills or infantry/cav outpacing fliers on roads.
I get where you are coming from concerning wanting Armor Knights not to get completely obliterated by magic units, but still every unit type needs some sort of weakness, and magic countering high physical armor is a logical and very traditional interaction in strategy games of this sort. I wouldn't be particularly happy to lose that dynamic. I think the real problem here is that the Fire Emblem Armor Knights suffer from a compounding of weaknesses. I.E., it's not just that they're slow and have a magic vulnerability, its that being both at the same time allows them to get doubled... on top of which you have the maneuverability issues & etc... on top of which you have incredibly potent anti-armor weapons. Some weapons should definitely be more effective vs armor than others, but in some FE games you can just give a guy a hammer and have him wipe an armor knight in one round of combat - that's not the way it should work at all.
The biggest problem I think is the lack of either A) a separate shield slot that allows armor knights (and on foot defensive unit) to be able to have the biggest defensive that they can (as they should be the only one that is able to equip the biggest shields) and B) a lack of ways to utilize their bulk in optimal play. Solving these 2 problem will more or less make the archetype way better.
I love heavy Armour unit, i always play the tank in various games and hearing they can play a big part makes me want to get this more. in armor we trust.
Love content like this. This game is giving me the same level excitement that new Fire Emblem titles always give me, and I'm fiending for crumbs of news leading up to release. Videos like these feed that itch, nice analysis.
Fun speculation video. I certainly hope the armor knights are great in this new game. Something to consider though, is the armor units in Fire Emblem Heroes (mobile game). Armor units in that game can do what you mention Unicorn Overlord armor knights can do, which is jump in front of allies who are being targeted. If that skill ever makes it to the main games, I think armor units can receive a huge buff!
So my initial thoughts are we’re probably going to all be making teams with a mix of “balanced” and “vanguard” sort of teams, your balanced team goes in, can take a hit, but is softening up enemy combatants and making it so your offensive focused team goes in and can get a kill. I also think that’s going to determine a lot of how movement is picked and what you set up in that regard, flying units being a strong choice for possibly every group you could want to make. I do wonder how this is all going to be balanced but that’s the fun of a new game and not really knowing. I really hope the game is good is all I’ll say. I hope it’s not something where you end up with less depth as you go along and one strategy dominates. Too many strategy games end up that way where you’re actually way less creative and thoughtful towards the end.
Idk why but never have got into Fire Emblem games despite trying ... Shining Force, Ogre Battle/Tactics, Final Fantasy Tactics, and Triangle Strategy have all been amazing though
Even in history heavy armor is a liability in a one on one fight. Its pricy, requires training to use effectively and limits the wearer in both stamina and mobility. So it makes sense that in Fire Emblem, a game more focused on heros and 1v1 duels that armor knights would be easy to deal with. Where armor becomes good is in squad and group combat. The larger the scale of combat the more specialized roles can become and heavy armor is a specialized role. What makes heavy armor work is coordination. I really do like the idea of being able to ODST drop a bunch of armor behind enemy lines by way of air heros though.
Tell me you have no clue about armor without telling me you have no clue about armor. Your points are only true in reverse. On the battlefield units not in the first lines off engagement wore offten times less armor to mittigate all the stamina issues you mentioned. In sieges, duells and where ever fighting was the most intense heavy armor was king!
The more we hear about the game, the more I am personally getting worried. It's now an open world strategy/tactics game with dozens of units, lots of systems and a lot of mechanics which are not really tested by any other game they made before. Also Vanillaware does not exactly have experience with this genre or made other tactical like games before, where they could gather some experience, so it seems like a herculean task. As much as I want to believe it is going to be great, there are so many moving parts in this game, that any meaningful way of balancing and pacing it seems like a rather challenging feat. On top of that there are so many new mechanics ... honestly it seems to me more and more like a behemoth which is not focusing on improving any particular problem with the genre, but offering all and regarding past experiences at this point I feel rather cautious, because pulling all of that off with a first iteration seems a bit wishful to me. Having the open world alone in a working state would meaningfully change up the genre in a major way, if it's designed in a way that it works for this type of game.
The basic combat system seems to be modeled on Ogre Battle; they've got a model to work off of there. If Symphony of War can adapt it successfully on the first go, I can't think of any reason Unicorn Overlord couldn't. I do agree that the overworld seems like it would be challenging to balance correctly; if you truly can go anywhere in any order, then I'd have to imagine they're using some sort of level scaling system to try to balance things. That would be legitimately hard to pull off well, but not impossible.
@@sinisterdesign Well Symphony was a lot more conservative in its design and also built up on Fire Emblem which as a series had a whole lot more iteration going on beforehand. There are not that many games with the original Ogre formula (Ogre Battle /64 ) and it got kind of abandoned in modern games. I am not saying it's impossible. It just seems that there are a lot of balls to juggle with and looking at everything they have - open world, gear, level progression, items, squadbuilding, food, day&night cycle, different races, tons of classes, class related skills, relationships... I think it's a ton of systems which each on their own could be incredibly deep, but in combination definitely lead to an exponential explosion of possibilities. Honestly balancing out a basic battle system with like 40-60 units already is a huge challenge, most indie developers who dabble in the genre the firs ttime don't get right. And while this is mor eprofessional, I think it's also many levels more ambitious.
@@thomasf2736 I hear your concerns, but I believe if any dev can do it, Vanillaware can. They made 13 Sentinels before this, and storywise that game should have been a complete mess. No spoilers, but they take nearly every single sci-fi anime trope they can find, stuff it in a blender with real-time-with-pauses tactical combat, an interesting cast of anime characters, and *make it work* somehow. Literally nobody asked for a game like 13 Sentinels, but when we got it, fans like me learned quick to adore it. That's making me want to trust Vanillaware with this massively ambitious task. I think they *got* this :)
Having played with the demo a bit, it seems they really took a lot of lessons from Ogre Battle 64, which is a game I've enjoyed for ages. Unicorn Overlord has a fresh feel to it, and manages to be a spiritual successor to OB64 without feeling like a simple clone. Theres a lot more going on. Stanima being based on actions instead of movement means being isolated or outnumbered on the field can absolutely ruin even a very strong unit because getting caught resting means you become a punching bag. And the battle timer is a very present threat, at least in the early game and on Expert. I'm still early in the game because of the limitations of the demo, and I get they're incrementally introducing new unit types and mechanical concepts, but early it feels a little Rock-Paper-Scissors where if you see a thief, your only real option is to usr an archer, but the bones of the game promise much more depth and flexibility later on. Housecarls and mages are supposed to be good counters to thief evasion, and you can also limit evasion by guarding the theif's initial Passice Steal ability, say with a heavy armor unit. So overall the game does feel cohesive so far, and I'm optimistic that it will feel satisfying when the game opens up and all options are on the table.
Honestly armour knights suffer from 3 things: 1) Effective damage is too common & too effective. Resulting in random mooks that can just one or two shot your tank. And a tank archetype that dies in 1 turn to a handfull of random mooks simply does not work. And with how common it is to have magic or armour slayers it makes things very awkward very quickly for your tank. 2) Levels often simply aren't designed for armour knights. They're too big, too open, too focused on movement, too focused on aggresive play, they lack (side-)objectives for the armour knight to fullfill. So why would you ever bring armour when maps are designed like this? 3) Stat wise, other strong combat classes, like wyverns or paladins, are often "good enough". Who needs an armour knight when your paladin can already hold the chokepoint anyway? Fix those 3 things and armour works perfectly fine in FE. It's not even that hard to fix as it doesn't require any fundamental changes to the game. Just some small changes to the map & enemy design would solve their issues. Though I doubt they'll ever fix it in such a sensible small way; especially given what they did in Engage.
The main issue with armored units (and armor in general) in video games comes from how tricky it is to balance out. Believe it or not, but IRL heavy armor... was very good at it's job. So good at it that a medieval armored knight could be trampled by a horse and stand back up just fine. That's why so many people used them : they were VERY effective at keeping you alive. Thus, bringing heavy armor in a video game is... Difficult, as in : "How do I make it effective without making it completely ruin the game's balance ?". If we made heavy armor fully realistic in tactical or strategy games... There would be no room for light unit types, they'd just get trampled and everybody would be using heavy units simply because of how durable they would be compared to anything else. Thus, so as to make the game a bit more interesting in it's mecanics and class synergies, you have to nerf them, always, so as for battles to be something other than out-grinding the living brick wall that would be your opponent. It can be by limiting mobility, by providing the game without counters (like giving armor-piercing property to some weapons), making them extremely weak to a specific type of damage, etc... In Fire emblem's case, this concern led to armored knights being practically useless throughout their whole serie, which is a perfect example of "overdoing" it ^^
I didn't encounter this problem so much in fire emblem because I didn't play those games until later, but I sure is hell learned firsthand back when I played Vandal Hearts. I also love armor units, though I never experienced this problem so much in fire emblem because I didn't play any of those games until quite a bit later. But I sure as hell learn firsthand about this back in Vandal hearts.
Meh, I like the fact that you needed a airforce and a navy in something like ogre tactic. I feel the best to balance armored knight it should be in three ways: 1. Give them a horse like an actual knight, being counter specifically with magic and extra counter weapons or make them expensive budget wise 2. Make them a grunt unit pawn type unit that you can spam but are good trade unit against more valuable units and acts as buffer units 3. Give them the ability to support more like an armored cleric, like with a heal ability or some sort of defensive zone, like if you are within their support range they lay suppressive fire with a Jav or bow to prevent doubling, or actually reducing both magic and range. Balance-wise I don't think its wrong for a armored unit to force melee combat if mages can be on horses. Allowing them to cheat movement because the leader has a horse with wings or faster unit is a bridge to far with justification. If this game has any sort of budgeting system then I hope they keep them slow, cheap, tanky on top of dishing out the damage.
I agree that Fire Emblem seems to love giving armor knights the short end of the stick. Even if you take out the Armorslayer and Hammer, Levin Sword does good damage to armor knights.
Syphony of War, Nephilim saga is actually a good example or making heavy knights actually viable too. I see alot of similarities here with Unicorn overlord.
Oh don't worry, I'm familiar by proxy. I've also played Symphony of War, The Nephilim Saga which uses the same squad systems. I'm comparing to Fire Emblem here since it's the more popular series, so a lot of people who've played FE may be coming in to UO. So, the comparison will help them see how armors should be better here, and how they'll work in the unique systems of UO and the Ogre Battle series.
If they didn't switch between making fliers and cavalry so strong between each FE entry armor knights might have been updated sooner. The fact they can travel 8-10 squares, have access to every physical weapon, and oftentimes get a magic subset in some games really makes armor knights useless. Who wants Pavise as a skill when most units can do a disgusting 120 hp damaging hit in some games without even trying?
"We haven't seen anything... that implies that there is special effectiveness against Armor Knights..." I think all those 1 Damage displays in the trailer are evidence enough that they likely have both weaknesses you think they don't. I also think it's reasonably likely they may slow down their squad's movement--OgreBattle: MotBQ did that with all top-tier Dragons.
Ogre Battle March of the Black Queen had a weight stat for each character. Total weight of each movement type in the unit determine what kind of movement the unit had. I wonder if Unicorn Overlord will have something similar. Just give us a demo already!!
Considering how UO's mission design favors offensive and initiative rather than defense, I can see armor knights being a tad more overtuned to compensate that
If there is bonus against air, there will almost certainly be something against armor. But most of Armor knights issues in Fire Emblem is player based, because they insist on playing in way that movement is more important than the developers likely intended.
Ok so there will be 2 comments based on 2 seperate things. This one is. You set my next challenge run in engage. Nothing but generals. Only people who start off as armor general or great knight. As well as tanky lords such as diamant alphred and timerra. And alear of course
Even though it isn't specified as a weakness for armor knights. I remember seeing a pole arm with a hook on the end of it. But then again I consider armor knights to be cavalry. (Mostly because knights tend to have armor right?)😅
So High HP, High defence and resistance, deal massive damage, no apparent weakness, fast enough movement to catch up to lighter units, and ignores terrain. Yup, seems like a good idea.
It did! However, it doesn't seem like IS was happy with the system, since we haven't seen it since Fates. Since it seems like you may be able to do it here with a whole squad as well, it should be a bit more impactful as well.
Armor knight have only ever been remotely debilitating in fe4. That's a crazy exaggeration. They're not optimal, sure, but if you do decide to use them they usually do their job very well.
Great Knight? I think it's quite good. Doesn't have the benefit of being unbreakable, but it's a very tanky, mobile class that's versatile with weapons. I've loved it ever since they introduced it in FE8
Engage definitely could have been a huge progression in the usefulness of Armor Knights, but then they decided Maddening AI should completely ignore anything it can't damage. Now armors can't even do the one thing they used to be able to do in safely softening units on enemy phase.
Armor Knights were pretty bad in Ogre Battle 64, alas (which this game is a spiritual successor to. IIRC some of the people working on this game worked on that game). Although part of that was due to some really weird design decisions in the mechanics (like how most armour just gives physical resist and thus is practically ignored by anything using an elemental weapon). Other parts though were simillar to Fire Emblem in that they just don't scale well or get as many extra abilities as other units do as you promote them etc. Hopefully they won't be as bad here.
As a person who knows nothing about fire emblem, it sounds like the ability to create terrain could be cool too. So you bottle neck non magic to an armor knight or something as possible fix.
want this but also never finished 3houses due to the long school stuff. now also looking at tactics ogre. i have no time for all this so miss or drop, damn damn
@@TitaniumLegman also, to break down, I already mention the supports being a FE thing. Story is debatable, Ogre Battle had a much more grander story than Fire Emblem, and a much darker and political tone than any FE game. FE's story, yes involved army's but at it's core had always been a "chosen one" story line. going off of what we know about the story of this game so far, it's more about political intrigue than anything else. I'd argue the art style closely matches Ogre Battle more, it's grittier than FE, while FE over the times has more simplistic designs and tend to match the current popular anime design of the era. Bows vs fliers isn't an "FE thing", and Ogre Battle had type weaknesses as well. Like some are weak vs specific type damages. Not to mention the core gameplay, aesthetic and menus are all direct inspirations from Ogre Battle.
If FE knights weren't weak to magic, you could just solo maps with them. I'll take the understanding of "Weak vs magic" vs the alternate solution which would be to sneak in Hammers and Armor Slayers onto the enemy ranks. Though Engage maybe solves that problem another way with it's unique take on poison which still throws me off. My point is at least when dealing with mages, I have a clear area to avoid just from the unit type rather than scrolling through and going "WHO'S the git with the hammer?". This just feels like "I never want to take damage at all because it's funny" which true but I'd rather not have the entire game be able to be invalidated cause you can stick big metal guys into every squad. Option vs requirement.
@@TitaniumLegman Relax I have a day job. You said they are making armor knights awesome again but you don't actually have any evidence they are. It is more of a "I hope" and here are ideas on how but no real evidence they are.
@@richardtasden4417So do I. The evidence is literally in the video, what? New abilities, better support for movement, no notable anti armor attacks... What more do you want?
@@TitaniumLegman At every point you even state you aren't sure about it. "I haven't seen evidence of anti armor attacks" that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. That literally doesn't mean anything. The things you can point to, like squad movement, you aren't even sure how that works only there is something there. I guess you know things you aren't allowed to say yet but as presented, this video is mostly speculation and pieces to a larger puzzle.
tl;dr fire emblem lower tier armor knights are bad in poster's opinion[not mentioning generals], makes assumptions that UO's armor knights are going to be necessary[duh tank in a squad type game] acknowledges, but misses the point of pair up from FE: awakening[ armor knight/general with mage OP] talks of movement based on lead unit praising UO, but shxt talking FE ignores the level ups showing stats that infer that armor knights are still going to get spanked by mage [should have removed that clip if you weren't going to acknowledge it] @ 4:57 overall, poor quality video, missed opportunities of speaker 4/10 Would be more convincing had he removed the level up clip noted how different classes move at the same speed, but speed is also affected by terrain @ 3:40 and talked about the possibilities of leader passives that buff armor knights instead of armor knight leader abilites such as maybe a mage leader or barrier master that would let one make a unit of only armor knights that now have magic resist
picturing a pegasus knight hoisting up a big clunky armor unit and just tossing it over a river, lol
Conquest cheve map flashbacks!!
Any game with rescue says hi
Rescue and pair up: “yeah… haha so silly… 😗
This comment is so confusing without watching the video and it shows up as my comment preview
Ogre Battle 64 came out 25 years ago and in every playthrough I've completed, I've finished with a different number/style of units. Building each member up and pairing them with a unit is such a great game mechanic! Excited to see the possibilities on March 8th!
I assume it's an N64 game?
Legionnaire + Sainted Knight is a pretty powerful combo I didn't discover soon enough.
You like big men and you cannot lie,
Those other units can't deny.
And when a tank walks in with an Itty bitty pace with a round shield in your face...
@@TheGameReaper948 ...you get kabong'd! They're standin' tough, 'cause you know that armor's stuffed! Filled with a stalwart ally, them foes are all gonna die!
Great video! Always loved armor units, despite their weaknesses. It's a blast throwing them at the right opponents and watching them all crumble against the wall.
Couldn't agree more!
People will hate, HATE Arden in FE4 Remake if the large map system is back. I always enjoy making him the best unit slaying both enemies and the ladies lol.
I adore Armoured units. Heavy Armour is my absolute jam.
Draug, Valbar, Lukas, Forsyth, Arden, Gwendolyn (even if her brother and other compatriot are better), Oswin, Hector (not really an "armour" unit but he has the stats and looks of one), Gilliam, especially General Amelia (because taking a waif of a girl and making her into a brute powerhouse that can swing a greataxe in one hand like it's nothing is both hilarious and endearing to me), Kellam, Effie (prefer her JP version), Benny, most anyone in Three Houses (it became a meme for me to run a full team of Fortress Knights against the most magic-heavy routes), Louis, and Jade (personal favourite character from Engage).
I cannot overstate how much I love heavy armour characters / units. I'm always using characters like the Man-at-Arms and Leper in Darkest Dungeon, or anything similar!
I'd never heard of this game before... Definitely going to have to look into it. The ability the armour units have, to defend an ally in place of them, reminds me of Archibald from Stella Glow - he did the same thing. Saved my butt a lot on the final bosses.
Benny is my fave😊
Brom was that guy in PoR. I admittedly save scummed to get his speed and resist maxed. His speed was quite good for a General.
Good ol Brom, love him but yeah.
The second comment might be a slight correction if the style plays like ogre battle. It would be a march speed change and not a range because you can set a range. Then to answer your slight inquiries, if it plays like ogre battle then the terrain to u it type would most likely effect the speed. Then with the flyers being able to carry the units. I hope they made all flyers faster than 1 flyer carrying infantry but that will be revealed later possible after release
I'm thinking they might just be leaning into other bonus to keep you off all flying squads like wanting certain leader skills or infantry/cav outpacing fliers on roads.
I get where you are coming from concerning wanting Armor Knights not to get completely obliterated by magic units, but still every unit type needs some sort of weakness, and magic countering high physical armor is a logical and very traditional interaction in strategy games of this sort. I wouldn't be particularly happy to lose that dynamic. I think the real problem here is that the Fire Emblem Armor Knights suffer from a compounding of weaknesses. I.E., it's not just that they're slow and have a magic vulnerability, its that being both at the same time allows them to get doubled... on top of which you have the maneuverability issues & etc... on top of which you have incredibly potent anti-armor weapons. Some weapons should definitely be more effective vs armor than others, but in some FE games you can just give a guy a hammer and have him wipe an armor knight in one round of combat - that's not the way it should work at all.
The biggest problem I think is the lack of either A) a separate shield slot that allows armor knights (and on foot defensive unit) to be able to have the biggest defensive that they can (as they should be the only one that is able to equip the biggest shields) and B) a lack of ways to utilize their bulk in optimal play. Solving these 2 problem will more or less make the archetype way better.
I love heavy Armour unit, i always play the tank in various games and hearing they can play a big part makes me want to get this more.
in armor we trust.
Love content like this. This game is giving me the same level excitement that new Fire Emblem titles always give me, and I'm fiending for crumbs of news leading up to release. Videos like these feed that itch, nice analysis.
Fun speculation video. I certainly hope the armor knights are great in this new game.
Something to consider though, is the armor units in Fire Emblem Heroes (mobile game). Armor units in that game can do what you mention Unicorn Overlord armor knights can do, which is jump in front of allies who are being targeted. If that skill ever makes it to the main games, I think armor units can receive a huge buff!
This footage makes me wanna replay Engage, it’s such a fun game
So my initial thoughts are we’re probably going to all be making teams with a mix of “balanced” and “vanguard” sort of teams, your balanced team goes in, can take a hit, but is softening up enemy combatants and making it so your offensive focused team goes in and can get a kill. I also think that’s going to determine a lot of how movement is picked and what you set up in that regard, flying units being a strong choice for possibly every group you could want to make. I do wonder how this is all going to be balanced but that’s the fun of a new game and not really knowing. I really hope the game is good is all I’ll say. I hope it’s not something where you end up with less depth as you go along and one strategy dominates. Too many strategy games end up that way where you’re actually way less creative and thoughtful towards the end.
Wyvern Lord dominating Three houses for example. Not enough enemies who can fuck you over and you can just speed through terrains.
I can't wait for this game!!
Idk why but never have got into Fire Emblem games despite trying ... Shining Force, Ogre Battle/Tactics, Final Fantasy Tactics, and Triangle Strategy have all been amazing though
FE and things like FFT are definitely two different genres of strategy game, so it's not all that odd that you might bounce off one and not the other.
Even in history heavy armor is a liability in a one on one fight. Its pricy, requires training to use effectively and limits the wearer in both stamina and mobility. So it makes sense that in Fire Emblem, a game more focused on heros and 1v1 duels that armor knights would be easy to deal with. Where armor becomes good is in squad and group combat. The larger the scale of combat the more specialized roles can become and heavy armor is a specialized role. What makes heavy armor work is coordination. I really do like the idea of being able to ODST drop a bunch of armor behind enemy lines by way of air heros though.
Tell me you have no clue about armor without telling me you have no clue about armor.
Your points are only true in reverse. On the battlefield units not in the first lines off engagement wore offten times less armor to mittigate all the stamina issues you mentioned.
In sieges, duells and where ever fighting was the most intense heavy armor was king!
What I find ridiculous about armour knights: They wear plate yet have shields and no helmets. 😂😂😂
The more we hear about the game, the more I am personally getting worried.
It's now an open world strategy/tactics game with dozens of units, lots of systems and a lot of mechanics which are not really tested by any other game they made before.
Also Vanillaware does not exactly have experience with this genre or made other tactical like games before, where they could gather some experience, so it seems like a herculean task.
As much as I want to believe it is going to be great, there are so many moving parts in this game, that any meaningful way of balancing and pacing it seems like a rather challenging feat. On top of that there are so many new mechanics ... honestly it seems to me more and more like a behemoth which is not focusing on improving any particular problem with the genre, but offering all and regarding past experiences at this point I feel rather cautious, because pulling all of that off with a first iteration seems a bit wishful to me.
Having the open world alone in a working state would meaningfully change up the genre in a major way, if it's designed in a way that it works for this type of game.
The basic combat system seems to be modeled on Ogre Battle; they've got a model to work off of there. If Symphony of War can adapt it successfully on the first go, I can't think of any reason Unicorn Overlord couldn't.
I do agree that the overworld seems like it would be challenging to balance correctly; if you truly can go anywhere in any order, then I'd have to imagine they're using some sort of level scaling system to try to balance things. That would be legitimately hard to pull off well, but not impossible.
@@sinisterdesign Well Symphony was a lot more conservative in its design and also built up on Fire Emblem which as a series had a whole lot more iteration going on beforehand. There are not that many games with the original Ogre formula (Ogre Battle /64 ) and it got kind of abandoned in modern games.
I am not saying it's impossible. It just seems that there are a lot of balls to juggle with and looking at everything they have - open world, gear, level progression, items, squadbuilding, food, day&night cycle, different races, tons of classes, class related skills, relationships... I think it's a ton of systems which each on their own could be incredibly deep, but in combination definitely lead to an exponential explosion of possibilities.
Honestly balancing out a basic battle system with like 40-60 units already is a huge challenge, most indie developers who dabble in the genre the firs ttime don't get right. And while this is mor eprofessional, I think it's also many levels more ambitious.
@@thomasf2736 I hear your concerns, but I believe if any dev can do it, Vanillaware can. They made 13 Sentinels before this, and storywise that game should have been a complete mess. No spoilers, but they take nearly every single sci-fi anime trope they can find, stuff it in a blender with real-time-with-pauses tactical combat, an interesting cast of anime characters, and *make it work* somehow.
Literally nobody asked for a game like 13 Sentinels, but when we got it, fans like me learned quick to adore it. That's making me want to trust Vanillaware with this massively ambitious task.
I think they *got* this :)
Having played with the demo a bit, it seems they really took a lot of lessons from Ogre Battle 64, which is a game I've enjoyed for ages.
Unicorn Overlord has a fresh feel to it, and manages to be a spiritual successor to OB64 without feeling like a simple clone. Theres a lot more going on. Stanima being based on actions instead of movement means being isolated or outnumbered on the field can absolutely ruin even a very strong unit because getting caught resting means you become a punching bag.
And the battle timer is a very present threat, at least in the early game and on Expert. I'm still early in the game because of the limitations of the demo, and I get they're incrementally introducing new unit types and mechanical concepts, but early it feels a little Rock-Paper-Scissors where if you see a thief, your only real option is to usr an archer, but the bones of the game promise much more depth and flexibility later on. Housecarls and mages are supposed to be good counters to thief evasion, and you can also limit evasion by guarding the theif's initial Passice Steal ability, say with a heavy armor unit.
So overall the game does feel cohesive so far, and I'm optimistic that it will feel satisfying when the game opens up and all options are on the table.
Honestly armour knights suffer from 3 things:
1) Effective damage is too common & too effective. Resulting in random mooks that can just one or two shot your tank. And a tank archetype that dies in 1 turn to a handfull of random mooks simply does not work. And with how common it is to have magic or armour slayers it makes things very awkward very quickly for your tank.
2) Levels often simply aren't designed for armour knights. They're too big, too open, too focused on movement, too focused on aggresive play, they lack (side-)objectives for the armour knight to fullfill. So why would you ever bring armour when maps are designed like this?
3) Stat wise, other strong combat classes, like wyverns or paladins, are often "good enough". Who needs an armour knight when your paladin can already hold the chokepoint anyway?
Fix those 3 things and armour works perfectly fine in FE. It's not even that hard to fix as it doesn't require any fundamental changes to the game. Just some small changes to the map & enemy design would solve their issues.
Though I doubt they'll ever fix it in such a sensible small way; especially given what they did in Engage.
The main issue with armored units (and armor in general) in video games comes from how tricky it is to balance out.
Believe it or not, but IRL heavy armor... was very good at it's job. So good at it that a medieval armored knight could be trampled by a horse and stand back up just fine. That's why so many people used them : they were VERY effective at keeping you alive.
Thus, bringing heavy armor in a video game is... Difficult, as in : "How do I make it effective without making it completely ruin the game's balance ?".
If we made heavy armor fully realistic in tactical or strategy games... There would be no room for light unit types, they'd just get trampled and everybody would be using heavy units simply because of how durable they would be compared to anything else.
Thus, so as to make the game a bit more interesting in it's mecanics and class synergies, you have to nerf them, always, so as for battles to be something other than out-grinding the living brick wall that would be your opponent.
It can be by limiting mobility, by providing the game without counters (like giving armor-piercing property to some weapons), making them extremely weak to a specific type of damage, etc...
In Fire emblem's case, this concern led to armored knights being practically useless throughout their whole serie, which is a perfect example of "overdoing" it ^^
I just noticed this video is older, and armor knights have hammers and two types of mages that are their weakness
I didn't encounter this problem so much in fire emblem because I didn't play those games until later, but I sure is hell learned firsthand back when I played Vandal Hearts. I also love armor units, though I never experienced this problem so much in fire emblem because I didn't play any of those games until quite a bit later.
But I sure as hell learn firsthand about this back in Vandal hearts.
March 8th can't get here fast enough. Every new piece of footage or info has me salivating
Meh, I like the fact that you needed a airforce and a navy in something like ogre tactic. I feel the best to balance armored knight it should be in three ways: 1. Give them a horse like an actual knight, being counter specifically with magic and extra counter weapons or make them expensive budget wise 2. Make them a grunt unit pawn type unit that you can spam but are good trade unit against more valuable units and acts as buffer units 3. Give them the ability to support more like an armored cleric, like with a heal ability or some sort of defensive zone, like if you are within their support range they lay suppressive fire with a Jav or bow to prevent doubling, or actually reducing both magic and range. Balance-wise I don't think its wrong for a armored unit to force melee combat if mages can be on horses.
Allowing them to cheat movement because the leader has a horse with wings or faster unit is a bridge to far with justification. If this game has any sort of budgeting system then I hope they keep them slow, cheap, tanky on top of dishing out the damage.
I love UO having the classic trope of the old man vet in heavy armor being the mentor till mid/late game xD glorious
always been a fan of Defense as the best Defense;
I agree that Fire Emblem seems to love giving armor knights the short end of the stick. Even if you take out the Armorslayer and Hammer, Levin Sword does good damage to armor knights.
Syphony of War, Nephilim saga is actually a good example or making heavy knights actually viable too. I see alot of similarities here with Unicorn overlord.
I think you should be taking a look at the Ogre Battle games from the 90s for a more direct comparison in squad combat. You might be surprised.
Oh don't worry, I'm familiar by proxy. I've also played Symphony of War, The Nephilim Saga which uses the same squad systems. I'm comparing to Fire Emblem here since it's the more popular series, so a lot of people who've played FE may be coming in to UO. So, the comparison will help them see how armors should be better here, and how they'll work in the unique systems of UO and the Ogre Battle series.
If they didn't switch between making fliers and cavalry so strong between each FE entry armor knights might have been updated sooner. The fact they can travel 8-10 squares, have access to every physical weapon, and oftentimes get a magic subset in some games really makes armor knights useless.
Who wants Pavise as a skill when most units can do a disgusting 120 hp damaging hit in some games without even trying?
"We haven't seen anything... that implies that there is special effectiveness against Armor Knights..." I think all those 1 Damage displays in the trailer are evidence enough that they likely have both weaknesses you think they don't. I also think it's reasonably likely they may slow down their squad's movement--OgreBattle: MotBQ did that with all top-tier Dragons.
magic dagger goes brrrrrr
Big true haha
I love to have tanky boys in battles
You and me both, brother.
yezzzaaa new video!
Ogre Battle March of the Black Queen had a weight stat for each character. Total weight of each movement type in the unit determine what kind of movement the unit had. I wonder if Unicorn Overlord will have something similar. Just give us a demo already!!
Considering how UO's mission design favors offensive and initiative rather than defense, I can see armor knights being a tad more overtuned to compensate that
If there is bonus against air, there will almost certainly be something against armor.
But most of Armor knights issues in Fire Emblem is player based, because they insist on playing in way that movement is more important than the developers likely intended.
I can't wait to get this game.
4:00 this point falls hard with magic weakness And Hammer warriors. At least there's assists or accessories that might help.
YOU ARE AWESOME! ❤❤❤
DID YOU GET THE PREORDER BOX WITH THE CARD GAME?! GET IT!!! TODAY!!! NOW!!!
😉
I love how most of the ways to fix Fire Emblem Armor Knights is to not be Fire Emblem
🤣
Ok so there will be 2 comments based on 2 seperate things. This one is. You set my next challenge run in engage. Nothing but generals. Only people who start off as armor general or great knight. As well as tanky lords such as diamant alphred and timerra. And alear of course
Even though it isn't specified as a weakness for armor knights. I remember seeing a pole arm with a hook on the end of it. But then again I consider armor knights to be cavalry. (Mostly because knights tend to have armor right?)😅
Yeah, gotta blame Fire Emblem for the naming conventions on that one. 🤣
IM SO GONA BUY THIS GAME
So High HP, High defence and resistance, deal massive damage, no apparent weakness, fast enough movement to catch up to lighter units, and ignores terrain. Yup, seems like a good idea.
That is not what was said.
@@TitaniumLegman That's exactly what was said
Nice!!
I thought pair up mechanic already did this. Using Peg Knights to carry them over.
It did! However, it doesn't seem like IS was happy with the system, since we haven't seen it since Fates. Since it seems like you may be able to do it here with a whole squad as well, it should be a bit more impactful as well.
I feel a lot of these "changes" were present in Ogre Battle 64
Most likely, but the majority of players who will be trying Unicorn Overlord probably haven't played or seen OB64
Armor knight have only ever been remotely debilitating in fe4. That's a crazy exaggeration. They're not optimal, sure, but if you do decide to use them they usually do their job very well.
They're not the worst, and I use them regularly as they're some of my favorites. But they get outclassed EASILY in many games in the series.
To be fair, Fire Emblem and Unicorn Overlord play completely differently.
Still sad I won't be able to play this on my PC
What do you think about armored mounted class in FE engage?
Great Knight? I think it's quite good. Doesn't have the benefit of being unbreakable, but it's a very tanky, mobile class that's versatile with weapons. I've loved it ever since they introduced it in FE8
oof some parts of this video didn't age well
Engage definitely could have been a huge progression in the usefulness of Armor Knights, but then they decided Maddening AI should completely ignore anything it can't damage. Now armors can't even do the one thing they used to be able to do in safely softening units on enemy phase.
Honestly I should have brought that up in this video, since I did a whole Vid about that when I was covering Engage. Excellent point!
Armor Knights were pretty bad in Ogre Battle 64, alas (which this game is a spiritual successor to. IIRC some of the people working on this game worked on that game). Although part of that was due to some really weird design decisions in the mechanics (like how most armour just gives physical resist and thus is practically ignored by anything using an elemental weapon). Other parts though were simillar to Fire Emblem in that they just don't scale well or get as many extra abilities as other units do as you promote them etc. Hopefully they won't be as bad here.
As a person who knows nothing about fire emblem, it sounds like the ability to create terrain could be cool too. So you bottle neck non magic to an armor knight or something as possible fix.
want this but also never finished 3houses due to the long school stuff. now also looking at tactics ogre. i have no time for all this so miss or drop, damn damn
PC version when
Comparing it to Fire emblem isn't a good comparison, this game is nothing like fire emblem, it's Ogre Battle.
It unquestionably takes elements of both.
@@TitaniumLegman the only aspect i see that is related to fire emblem is the support system. but everything else screams ogre battle.
Support system, marriage, character designs, story, classes, damage effectiveness against flyers all scream Fire Emblem.
@@TitaniumLegman that's not exclusively Fire Emblem though
@@TitaniumLegman also, to break down, I already mention the supports being a FE thing. Story is debatable, Ogre Battle had a much more grander story than Fire Emblem, and a much darker and political tone than any FE game. FE's story, yes involved army's but at it's core had always been a "chosen one" story line. going off of what we know about the story of this game so far, it's more about political intrigue than anything else.
I'd argue the art style closely matches Ogre Battle more, it's grittier than FE, while FE over the times has more simplistic designs and tend to match the current popular anime design of the era.
Bows vs fliers isn't an "FE thing", and Ogre Battle had type weaknesses as well. Like some are weak vs specific type damages.
Not to mention the core gameplay, aesthetic and menus are all direct inspirations from Ogre Battle.
Will it go to steam?
Only for consoles it seems, unfortunately.
On most tierlists, hoplites are utter trash. But I guess casual is different from expert gameplay.
This is a video from before the release of the demo, my guy.
If FE knights weren't weak to magic, you could just solo maps with them. I'll take the understanding of "Weak vs magic" vs the alternate solution which would be to sneak in Hammers and Armor Slayers onto the enemy ranks. Though Engage maybe solves that problem another way with it's unique take on poison which still throws me off. My point is at least when dealing with mages, I have a clear area to avoid just from the unit type rather than scrolling through and going "WHO'S the git with the hammer?". This just feels like "I never want to take damage at all because it's funny" which true but I'd rather not have the entire game be able to be invalidated cause you can stick big metal guys into every squad.
Option vs requirement.
PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC
So uh… this didn’t age well xD
They just had to make so many counters to my poor armors. 😭 They're still better than in FE because their utility, but still.
Fire emblem but better.
click bait title
Explain how
I'm waiting
@@TitaniumLegman Relax I have a day job. You said they are making armor knights awesome again but you don't actually have any evidence they are. It is more of a "I hope" and here are ideas on how but no real evidence they are.
@@richardtasden4417So do I.
The evidence is literally in the video, what? New abilities, better support for movement, no notable anti armor attacks... What more do you want?
@@TitaniumLegman At every point you even state you aren't sure about it. "I haven't seen evidence of anti armor attacks" that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. That literally doesn't mean anything. The things you can point to, like squad movement, you aren't even sure how that works only there is something there. I guess you know things you aren't allowed to say yet but as presented, this video is mostly speculation and pieces to a larger puzzle.
tl;dr fire emblem lower tier armor knights are bad in poster's opinion[not mentioning generals],
makes assumptions that UO's armor knights are going to be necessary[duh tank in a squad type game]
acknowledges, but misses the point of pair up from FE: awakening[ armor knight/general with mage OP]
talks of movement based on lead unit praising UO, but shxt talking FE
ignores the level ups showing stats that infer that armor knights are still going to get spanked by mage
[should have removed that clip if you weren't going to acknowledge it] @ 4:57
overall, poor quality video, missed opportunities of speaker 4/10
Would be more convincing had he removed the level up clip
noted how different classes move at the same speed, but speed is also affected by terrain @ 3:40
and talked about the possibilities of leader passives that buff armor knights instead of armor knight leader abilites
such as maybe a mage leader or barrier master that would let one make a unit of only armor knights that now have magic resist
Wow thanks professor